Board discusses Harvest Water Project milestones, forms ad hoc advisory committee

The Sacramento Area Sewer District board discussed progress on the Harvest Water Project and moved to form an ad hoc Harvest Water advisory committee at its Jan. 14, 2026 meeting. District Engineer Christophe Dobson updated the board on agreements with growers, grant milestones and construction claims, and directors pressed staff on risks to meeting state milestones and on building community goodwill.

Dobson said there is no immediate clawback tied to construction start but described milestone triggers for adaptive management. He reported the district met earlier milestones (a 20% recycled‑water delivery milestone previously and a 60% milestone), and said staff estimates current delivery progress in a 61%–82% range (which he summarized informally as "maybe, 70% or so"). He told the board the project is expected to begin delivery in 2027, with a first full year of delivery likely 2028; from that baseline staff said the requirements include reaching 50% of established demand during the third year of operations and then meeting 100% by a later milestone. (The spoken record contains inconsistent timeline references: Dobson also said earlier that 100% must be achieved by January 2029; later he referred to a 100% target in 2032. The board did not resolve that inconsistency on the record.)

Dobson also reported there are 75 on‑farm connection assembly agreements signed and that 13 construction claims are under review by the district's third‑party adjuster, which staff characterized as a low number relative to project magnitude. Several directors emphasized that cultivating goodwill with growers is crucial because agreements require two parties and participation is voluntary; Director Hume warned that failing to build trust now could increase costs later, saying, "we cannot lay pipe that will reach farther than the telephone wire." Director Villegas and Director Sewell also stressed the need for sustained outreach and partnership with growers and the state.

On the committee item staff proposed an ad hoc (non‑Brown Act) advisory committee with a minimum of three members and a maximum fewer than a quorum; reported volunteers include Desmond, Soon and Hume and additional volunteers were accepted. The clerk confirmed there were no public speaker slips on the item.

Board direction was procedural: staff will set up the ad hoc committee and continue outreach and agreement work; no formal policy change or allocation was adopted at this meeting.